OTTAWA — Google and Apple are warning that the Carney government’s effort to make it easier for police and spies to intercept private communications risks opening up “backdoors” in their products that would hinder Canadians’ privacy and make their data vulnerable to malicious hackers.
Officials from the multibillionaire tech giants railed against the legislation that Ottawa has argued would modernize police and spy powers as they testified in front of a parliamentary committee Tuesday, claiming the proposed reforms are overly broad and pose a risk to encryption in a way that could undermine user trust and goes further than other Western countries.
“Speaking as an engineer, we do not know of a way to deploy encryption technology that provides access only for the good guys without creating new ways for the bad guys to break in,” said Erik Neuenchwander, the senior director of user privacy and child safety at Apple.
“In other words, when you build a back door into an encrypted device, anyone can walk through, and because so much depends on encryption, we can’t take that risk.”
Jeanette Patell, the director of Google’s government affairs in Canada, said the proposed legislation, Bill C-22, “would treat all Canadians like potential suspects.”
“Without stronger definitions, the law could be used to force the dismantling of critical privacy of architecture, such as breaking encryption, overriding users’ data deletion controls, or building remote access capability, all of which could facilitate foreign interference and weaken global user privacy,” Patell said. “At a time when cyber threats are increasing in frequency and sophistication, and malicious actors are using AI tools to find and exploit vulnerabilities more quickly, we cannt afford to be creating new vulnerabilities.”
The searing criticism from two of the world’s biggest tech giants comes as Prime Minister Mark Carney‘s government attempts to usher in legislation that would make it easier for police and spies to get data in the digital age, which it argues is desperately needed to catch up with other Western countries.
The legislation — also known as the Lawful Access Act — would force select Canadian electronic service providers, including telecommunications companies, to upgrade their systems so they have the ability to hand over private communications to police when served with a warrant. It would also force select providers to store customers’ metadata, like time stamps of online conversations and IP addresses, for up to a year.
Who exactly falls under the scope of the legislation is yet to be detailed, but one of the proposals is to give the minister of public safety the power, subject to approval by a watchdog, to order any company to comply.
Since tabling the bill in March after a failed attempt last year, a rare alliance of civil liberties advocates and big tech companies has emerged to oppose it.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada Philippe Dufresne added his voice to the mounting criticism Tuesday, telling MPs he believes the bill needs to be curtailed to avoid infringing on Canadians’ privacy rights.
Dufresne struck a more measured tone in his criticism of the legislation, however, applauding the Carney government for making some improvements from its failed first attempt and saying he believes the right balance can be struck if remaining concerns are resolved.
Opposition MPs have also criticized the legislative effort for being too vague and accused the government of trying to rush it into law.
“The Liberals have really dropped the ball when it comes to their drafting, when it comes to explaining this bill. They’ve tried to ram it through committee, which is exactly something that they’ve been doing with their new-found majority,” Conservative MP Frank Caputo told reporters this week.
Even some Liberal MPs on the committee studying the bill expressed confusion at it.
“I’m a little surprised. I mean, given the size of Google and Apple, and how big these companies are. I’m a little confused that the legislation can be so vague that you don’t even know whether this applies to you,” Ontario Liberal MP Marcus Powlowski said Tuesday.
Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree has suggested he’s open to making amendments to the bill.
And government officials have tried to assuage the overwhelming criticism by insisting, for example, that the legislation does not intend to weaken any encryption systems or create systemic vulnerabilities.
Among the backers of the bill was Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown, who appeared virtually Tuesday and said that no one should be concerned about their privacy if they aren’t committing any crimes while urging MPs to consider victims’ rights.
Quebec Liberal MP Anthony Housefather questioned Apple’s own track record on privacy during Tuesday’s meeting and argued some of the criticism has been overblown.
“I don’t disagree with some of the objections you raised, but I think there’s claims that are being made, for example, surveillance equipment that could be installed in devices and for forcing companies even under orders to put surveillance equipment, that I don’t think are reasonable or logical, and I don’t think they bear out in the wording of the bill,” the MP said.
Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request.
There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again.
You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply.
Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page.
